ANJAIAH MUNIGELA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, NIZAMBAD

ITA 1210/HYD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 December 2024AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)8 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, while noting the assessee's non-compliance, granted one more opportunity in the interest of justice. The appeal was remanded to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment after providing the assessee with due opportunity of hearing and filing all supporting documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in milling and trading of rice, filed its return for AY 2012-13. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated scrutiny due to information about short payment of sales tax and made additions for VAT/Sales Tax and Chapter VI-A deductions after the assessee failed to respond to notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of VAT payments and Chapter VI-A deductions was justified, and whether the assessee was provided with a reasonable opportunity to present evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37(1),Section 43B,Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 250(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A
For Respondent: Shri U Mini Chandran, Sr.D.R
Hearing: 18.12.2024Pronounced: 18.12.2024

PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M:

This appeal is filed by the assessee feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 28.09.2024 for the AY 2012-13. 2 ITA 1210/Hyd/2024

2.

The grounds raised by the assessee read as under :

“1. The order of the CIT(A), NFAC is erroneous both on facts and in law.

2.

The Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal.

3.

The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of VAT payments of Rs. 20,18,385/-

4.

The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance made of Rs. 32,382/-.

5.

The Ld. CIT(

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 37(1)

All 6,995 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →